Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Nataliya's Reviews > Jane Eyre

Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
3672777
's review

really liked it
bookshelves: i-also-saw-the-film, awesome-kickass-heroines, 2012-reads, my-childhood-bookshelves

Yes, I suppose you can view this book mostly as a love story. That's what I did at age 13 - but that's why I was left disappointed back then¹.



Or you can view this as an story of formation of a strong and independent female protagonist, a nineteenth-century feminist, light-years ahead of its time. And that's what left my now-closer-to-thirty-than-twenty self very satisfied and, quite frankly, rather impressed.²
¹(view spoiler)

² "I do not think, sir, you have any right to command me, merely because you are older than I, or because you have seen more of the world than I have; your claim to superiority depends on the use you have made of your time and experience."

Sing it, Jane. You tell him, you strong and awesome woman, you!
When I read it for the first time as a young and opinionated teen, I thought Jane Eyre was a boring and meek protagonist, too clingy to her 'outdated' morals, too afraid to do what I thought was a brave thing to do - say 'yes' to the apparent happiness that poor tragic Mr. Rochester was offering. (Oh naive young me, putting way too much stock in Rochester's woes after his (view spoiler), sleeping with everyone in Europe and rejecting them probably because they were not English enough for him!) Wow, was there ever a way to misunderstand a book more than I did this one? Sometimes life experience does matter indeed.

Jane Eyre has a good idea of her self-worth. And she has a good idea about her own morals. And, unlike many in her situation, she sticks to her morals and her idea of what is wrong or right regardless of what outcome is in it for her. Here is the prime example:
"Gentlemen in his station are not accustomed to marry their governesses."
The emphasis in this well-intentioned advice by Mrs. Fairfax is on the word MARRY. Ah, silly old lady, one may think, cautioning the young woman in such a prudish way. Ah, silly young woman, taking the advice of the old lady and acting prudishly. Ah, silly young woman, eventually rejecting the sincere love and offer of happiness for a seemingly prudish reason - not wanting to be a mistress. So old-fashioned and weak and caged-up, screamed my thirteen-year-old self.

But here's the thing. It's not just for the moral lesson for the readers that Bronte has Jane firmly say 'no'. It's not for the sake of mere societal appearance. It's for the sake of Jane, and Jane alone. MARRYING governesses was uncommon. Having them as mistresses - probably not as rare. In her society, protecting her virtue and reputation was not only the matter of religious views or stigma - it was the question of her future, as she had nobody to stand up for her if her reputation was ruined. And it was a question of her integrity - the quality that she maintains through thick and thin, refusing to fall head over heels for love, refusing to let love justify all the mistakes and wrong choices, refusing to let love blind her to everything else that was important for her sense of self-worth.



By refusing Rochester, Jane stays so true to herself without ever betraying herself. Jane refuses to take the steps that would destroy her integrity in her own eyes, and for that she has my strongest and most sincere respect and admiration. What Rochester did is unthinkable to her - not because of how others view it but because of her morals and convictions - and she shows unbelievable courage in sticking up for what she believes in, even if it is to her own material and soul-wrecking detriment. She will not give herself fully to something - or someone - that would destroy her integrity, tarnish her own self. And I love her for this unwavering determination to stay true to herself!
"Reader, I married him" may be one of the most famous phrases from this book (actually, the most famous, come to think of it) - but it is her refusal to marry him in the first place that allows her to keep her integrity and remain true to self, and continue developing into the amazing person she becomes. Jane has too much self-worth to have Rochester until he redeems himself in her eyes, until he repents. That's the point, not the marriage part.
Despite self-proclaimed meekness, Jane Eyre is far from weak or scared. She has been forced to make her own way in life without the luxury of relying on a rich male relative - father, brother, husband. And she did this in the world where being attached to a man was the best choice for a woman (just remember Jane Austen's heroines a few decades earlier reaching happiness only after finding a suitable gentleman!). She is a rebel - setting out to have her own career in a male-dominated world, refusing to let a man rule her life (that applies to both Rochester and St. John here), and making statements that may have not had the most sympathetic audience back in her day:
"Women are supposed to be very calm generally: but women feel just as men feel; they need exercise for their faculties, and a field for their efforts, as much as their brothers do; they suffer from too rigid a restraint, to absolute a stagnation, precisely as men would suffer; and it is narrow-minded in their more privileged fellow-creatures to say that they ought to confine themselves to making puddings and knitting stockings, to playing on the piano and embroidering bags. It is thoughtless to condemn them, or laugh at them, if they seek to do more or learn more than custom has pronounced necessary for their sex."
And here's what else I enjoyed about this book - its attempts to subvert the tropes, the same tropes that we still heavily rely on in literature. Bronte gets rid of the 'faultless' heroine - instead of being perfect (or having an imaginary flaw, like many literary heroines are prone to nowadays) Jane has a real one (for her time, at least) - her occasional temper. And she is not beautiful - not fake flaws, either but a consensus by many impartial observers that she is not a beauty. And to take it a step further - Mr. Rochester, our romantic lead, is quite frankly, rather ugly. This is not a beautiful couple (and Hollywood managed to "fix" that in all the movie adaptations, by the way - a slap in Bronte's face, I guess?). Jane is not in love with a pretty façade of Rochester - since he has none (a thing that contemporary writers should learn, by the way - writing love that stems from something else that simple attraction to physical beauty).



And finally, the atmosphere of this story. Oh, the wonderfully gothic atmosphere written so well, with intense moods palpable in every paragraph. So colorful, so vivid, so immersing - every room, every moor, every tree. Every description of landscape or interior actually serves a purpose to establish the mood of the scene, and it is very well-done.
.................................
All that said, I'm giving a condescending pat on the shoulder to my teenage self from the 'wisdom' of another fifteen years. Sorry, teen Nataliya, you little annoying know-it-all - you just needed to grow up to appreciate this story. 4.5 stars and high recommendation.
2164 likes ·  âˆ� flag

Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read Jane Eyre.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

May 2, 2010 – Shelved
August 19, 2012 – Started Reading
August 19, 2012 –
0.0% "People whose opinions I respect greatly have loved this book. I did not care about it much back when I read it as an opinionated teenager. Was I missing something in that early read? I guess a re-read is the only way to fins out."
August 20, 2012 –
0.0% "[...]But women feel just as men feel; they need exercise for their faculties, and a field for their efforts, as much as their brothers do; they suffer from too rigid a restraint, too absolute a stagnation, precisely as men would suffer; and it is narrow-minded in their more privileged fellow-creatures to say that they ought to confine themselves to making puddings and knitting stockings, to playing on the piano [...]"
August 22, 2012 – Finished Reading

Comments Showing 1-50 of 151 (151 new)


aPriL does feral sometimes I've discovered my opinion changes depending on whether I was a child or adult, and if I'm wearing my reader or (amateur ) critic's hat, when reading books. I hated this book as a child, liked it as an adult. I didn't like her mannered responses when I was little. I wanted HER to burn the house down at age 12! ( I was very mannered as a child, a teacher's pet.)


Nataliya April the Cheshire Meow wrote: "I've discovered my opinion changes depending on whether I was a child or adult, and if I'm wearing my reader or (amateur ) critic's hat, when reading books. I hated this book as a child, liked it a..."

As a kid, I was bothered by what I perceived as Jane's weakness and spinelessness. Now I can't help but see her maturity and courage. So far I'm really enjoying this story. Teenage me did not know best, it appears.


message 3: by Sesana (new)

Sesana Oh, how I love this book! I never tried to read it as a teenager, which is probably good. I don't know if I was ready for it. I adore Jane now, but as a teenager I might not have been able to appreciate her strength for what it is.


Jason Will this be getting the infamous Nataliya treatment? I'd love to hear your thoughts on it, even if it's just a brief review.


Nataliya Oh, it is in the process of getting the 'Nataliya treatment' - but it will be overwhelmingly positive, quite unlike what I thought it would be. It's just that I have spent up to 17 hours a day working lately - kinda dampens my reviewing productivity.


Michael Nataliya wrote: "Oh, it is in the process of getting the 'Nataliya treatment' -..."
What happens when experiencing your reviews is more satisying that reading the books? It's like Cliff's Note with pizzazz. If only more books came with illustrations--they seem dull in comparison. Hopefully soon they will have little video clips, sort of like the newspapers in Harry Potter, a multisensory experience!


Nataliya Well, Michael, I think that book publishers uniformly assume that most book-loving adults have moved on past the phase where they like seeing pictures in their sizeable tomes. I. on the other hand, am still stuck in childhood in this way (maybe because when I was a kid I prided myself on reading books with no pictures in them, and now I overcompensate!)


Algernon (Darth Anyan) So, you can read now The Eyre Affair while the original story is still fresh


Katy I know I've read this book, because I distinctly remember also having to read Wide Sargasso Sea and having to compare them based upon their differing POVs, and while I can sort of remember WSS, I just can NOT remember much about *this* book... I think I have an ebook version of it, I'll have to re-read it some day...


Nataliya Algernon wrote: "So, you can read now The Eyre Affair while the original story is still fresh"

I've read mixed reactions about that book. Is it actually any good?

Katy wrote: "I know I've read this book, because I distinctly remember also having to read Wide Sargasso Sea and having to compare them based upon their differing POVs, and while I can sort of remember WSS, I j..."

You can also read it online through Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ - just follow the 'read it' button under the picture of the book cover.


message 11: by Katy (new) - rated it 3 stars

Katy Yes, I saw that; but I decided to download the .epub from Project Gutenburg.org, so when i get a chance, I'll probably read it that way.


Algernon (Darth Anyan) The Eyre Affair is a little silly in places, but it also has a lot of word games and literary puns. I found it a fast and enjoyable ride, even if some of the finer points of references to Jane Eyre may have been lost on me. Like , you I read this when I was too young (13 or 14) and haven't gone back to it since.


message 13: by Moira (new) - added it

Moira "Reader, I married him" may be one of the most famous phrases from this book (actually, the most famous, come to think of it) - but it is her refusal to marry him in the first place that allows her to keep her integrity and remain true to self, and continue developing into the amazing person she becomes. Jane has too much self-worth to have Rochester until he redeems himself in her eyes, until he repents. That's the point, not the marriage part.

AMEN. So nice to see this emphasized!


message 14: by Moira (new) - added it

Moira Nataliya wrote: "Algernon wrote: "So, you can read now The Eyre Affair while the original story is still fresh"
I've read mixed reactions about that book. Is it actually any good?"


Ohh dear. I really kind of hated it. Everyone else loves it, tho. It's not actually that Gothic, or really that related to Bronte's book, even.


Jason You really kicked your 13 year-old self's ass! Good for you, Nataliya. Jane is one of the strongest female characters I've ever come across in literature. I completely love this book.


message 16: by Kris (new) - rated it 5 stars

Kris I am so glad you re-read Jane Eyre, Nataliya - and that you have written a review that underscores just how strong Jane is. This is definitely a novel that requires some life experience on the part of the reader to fully appreciate Jane's decisions along the way.

(view spoiler)


B0nnie Nataliya thanks for this nice analysis of Jane Eyre. It's one of my favourite books as well. Catie, that film adaptation with Tobey Stephenson and Ruth Wilson is one I haven't seen - I'll definitely check it out. There's a site that compare these - The Enthusiast's Guide to Jane Eyre Adaptations (well there's probably a lot of sites that do this):


Jason Catie wrote: "FYI, I really loved the film adaptation with Tobey Stephenson and Ruth Wilson. They are both interesting looking, but I wouldn't call either one of them pretty."

That was a TV miniseries, right? I haven't seen that one, but the recent Cary Fukunaga one I liked a lot. In fact, I'm a fan of that director—he did Sin Nombre in 2008 which was one of my favorite movies from that year.


message 19: by Jubilation Lee (new)

Jubilation Lee Good lord, I may have to reread the book, since I think at the time I read it I also was a little too caught up on the lovey-dovey, "JANE DAMMIT WHY ARE YOU SUCH A COWARD WHY WON'T YOU MARRY HIM?!" aspect of the story....


Nataliya Monica! wrote: "Good lord, I may have to reread the book, since I think at the time I read it I also was a little too caught up on the lovey-dovey, "JANE DAMMIT WHY ARE YOU SUCH A COWARD WHY WON'T YOU MARRY HIM?!"..."

I think it's easy to focus just on that part, given the modern day morals that we have. I'm so glad I gave this book another chance and was able to see past that initial impression of Jane's cowardice!


Nataliya Catie wrote: "So glad you gave this one another chance - it's one of my favorite books of all time. I've read it a bunch of times and I feel like I get something different from it each time. FYI, I really love..."

I haven't seen this adaptation (and now I'm very much going to!) But from the picture that you posted I find Mr. Rochester quite interesting-looking, if not outright attractive.


Jason In the Fukunaga, it's Michael Fassbender, who—amazingly—keeps his pants on the whole time.

jane eyre


Nataliya Jason wrote: "In the Fukunaga, it's Michael Fassbender, who—amazingly—keeps his pants on the whole time.

"


That's only thanks to Jane's ironclad morals ;) There was no way around it!


Jason Nataliya wrote: "That's only thanks to Jane's ironclad morals ;) There was no way around it!"

Oh, no doubt!


Nataliya Catie wrote: "I guess I really need to watch the new adaptation! Enthusiast's Guide - that's brilliant!"

I liked the new one. It was not 100% faithful to the book as I realize now, but it worked really well as a movie. I loved how Jane was portrayed in it!

I'm watching the 2006 series now - and it is good (except for Adele - what did they do to that adorable child from the book???)


message 26: by J.P. (new) - rated it 5 stars

J.P. I know when I was in high school I had very little appreciation for books. I need to go back and give another try to those that I tossed aside back then.
I also like a strong protagonist which is why I really enjoyed this book as opposed to a novel like Tess of the d’Urbervilles. Tess is a ding-a-ling by comparison, having her will bent by every guy she meets.


Jason I don't think Tess is a ding-a-ling. I just think Hardy likes to give his characters hell. Jane has a tough life, no doubt, but she is definitely afforded the luxury of not being put through the same set of hoops that Tess has to deal with.


message 28: by Sesana (new)

Sesana Lovely review, Nataliya. Reading this as an adult, I was moved by Jane's choice in a way I doubt I could have been as a teenager. I would have been hung up on her walking away from love and would have completely missed that chose her own integrity over the opinion of anybody else, even Mr. Rochester's.


Nataliya Sesana wrote: "Lovely review, Nataliya. Reading this as an adult, I was moved by Jane's choice in a way I doubt I could have been as a teenager. I would have been hung up on her walking away from love and would h..."

Thanks, Sesana! This is exactly why I'm really glad I read it again as an adult. It's easy as a teenager to let the love story overshadow everything.


message 30: by Henry (last edited Aug 27, 2012 10:11PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Henry Avila Surprised how much I enjoyed the book,Nataliya.My sister reads all this stuff.


Wendy Darling I adore Jane. Lovely review, Nataliya.


Nataliya Wendy Darling wrote: "I adore Jane. Lovely review, Nataliya."

Thanks, Wendy! Jane has quickly become one of my favorite literary characters. That little 'meek' girl is actually a bastion of strength!


Michael Fierce Cute review.


Nataliya Michael wrote: "Cute review."

Thanks, Michael.


Michael Fierce Nataliya wrote: "Well, Michael, I think that book publishers uniformly assume that most book-loving adults have moved on past the phase where they like seeing pictures in their sizeable tomes. I. on the other hand,..."

I like books with pictures too.


Michael Fierce signed,

Other Michael


message 37: by Estra (new)

Estra Well said! I enjoyed your review very much! It was exactly what I felt like after I read the book, and exactly why I loved this book and Jane so soo much. Of course I was ecstatic that they did end up together, but it was made better knowing that she stuck to her principles throughout (no matter how much it broke her own heart) and only went to him AFTER he REDEEMED himself. In my eyes, that was what made their love great, the fact that they went through so much to be with each other, instead of (as you mentioned with Austen) merely finding someone rich with lots of land.


Nataliya Jane wrote: "Well said! I enjoyed your review very much! It was exactly what I felt like after I read the book, and exactly why I loved this book and Jane so soo much. Of course I was ecstatic that they did end..."

Thanks, Jane! I fully agree with what you said about your namesake.


Katharine Absolutely brilliant review! You pointed out so many of the elements of the story that I've always cherished, and which also drive me crazy because other people never notice them!


Nataliya Katharine wrote: "Absolutely brilliant review! You pointed out so many of the elements of the story that I've always cherished, and which also drive me crazy because other people never notice them!"

Thanks, Katharine!


Stefan strong, yes. Independent, yes. But lightyears ahead of its time? Not quite.
She is still very much part of the English class system, has a patronizing view on peasants for instance, is fairly bigoted as she is convinced of the superiority of English civilization and still too religiously obedient to be 'light years ahead of her time'.
Read Moby Dick and you will find a much more liberal, free spirit, believing in the equality of men. THAT book struck me as even ahead of THIS time.


message 42: by Nataliya (last edited Nov 29, 2012 10:54AM) (new) - rated it 4 stars

Nataliya Stefan wrote: "strong, yes. Independent, yes. But lightyears ahead of its time? Not quite.
She is still very much part of the English class system, has a patronizing view on peasants for instance, is fairly bigo..."


Stefan, I will disagree. Yes, Jane is still a child of her time, with the feeling of class superiority and racism. I will not touch on her religious obedience as so many people now allow religion to completely guide them in their lives, and if not religion then another comparably strong conviction or belief. My impression of character of Jane being ahead of her time stems from her fierce sense of self-worth and striving for independence. She insists on supporting herself with her work, even when having quite enviable from social standpoint marriage prospects. She refuses to be dependent on her rich suitor. She maintains her feistiness and independence when other women would be expected to surrender everything, to be meek and weak (yes, Jane considers herself meek and weak but she's the furthest thing from that!) She is amazingly self-reliant, does not shy away from working for living - and in the position that was not necessarily appropriate for a more or less noble lady, and would have fared well in this world if she did not have a rich man to marry - something that is admirable in women of her time period. Actually, her religious obedience to me highlighted her iron will to adhere to her moral principles, regardless of the nature of origin of these principles. Given her upbringing, I would be amazed if she did not have the views mentioned. She may not be the embodiment of progress how we view it 150+ years later, but she was light years ahead of her time as far as portrayal of women goes in the literature of that time period.

As for Moby-Dick, I'm halfway through my re-read of it now. Actually, it does have quite a few qualities that you notice in Jane Eyre. Ishmael (when he's still recognizable as narrator - as later narrator seems to have little to do with the simple American sailor from the beginning of the story) is quite racist (even though he makes an excellent effort at getting over that), seems to frequently hold Western civilization and Christianity superior to others (even though he advocates tolerance - but my impression was that this tolerance stemmed from good-natured feeling of superiority). I never got the impression of equality from Moby Dick - more of tolerance than anything else. I don't see it as more ahead of its time than Jane Eyre - just very different, dealing with men who could afford to have ideas and actions that can be viewed now as more progressive. You and I appear to view these books from a different perspective - and I find it fascinating how the perspective affects the perception of the book and its ideas.


Michael Fierce Nataliya wrote: "As for Moby-Dick...it does have quite a few qualities that you notice in Jane Eyre"

I think you should write a cryptid dramedy called, Jane Dick.


Stefan Thanks Nataliya for your long and clear answer.
I don't expect either one of us to change his opinion about these books, and that's not the point anyway.
I guess my trouble with Jane Eyre stems from the fact that it's overly romantic and twists and turns to come up with a very convenient happy ending.
I think the difference of tone in the books (in my opinion of course) comes from the fact that Moby Dick was written in America, when it was still a wild and free, young country where everybody started afresh. Charlotte Brontë wrote her book in England, where the difference in social classes were still very much in vigor.


Nataliya Stefan wrote: " think the difference of tone in the books (in my opinion of course) comes from the fact that Moby Dick was written in America, when it was still a wild and free, young country where everybody started afresh. Charlotte Brontë wrote her book in England, where the difference in social classes were still very much in vigor."

Well, you are right - to a point. America did not have the rigidity of social strata that 19th century England had, and it was proud about it. But wild and free is a romanticized notion of American society at that time. Instead of rigid social classes of British nobility there was a stark racial division leading to very clear-cut stratification. Pequod seemed to me to be a rather hierarchical place to be, with very strict roles held by the "American" ship officers, and subordinate roles held by the non-white harpooners, and the influence of those in power seemed absolute - Ahab's word seemed to be gospel, didn't it? The classes were different but they're still very much present.

"I guess my trouble with Jane Eyre stems from the fact that it's overly romantic and twists and turns to come up with a very convenient happy ending."

Well, Jane Eyre is clearly a romance novel, unlike Moby Dick, and therefore is destined to have a happy ending by the genre conventions. It was just its divergence from traditional "female" books and female stereotypes that made it stand out for me.


message 46: by Derek (new)

Derek I can't say I ever expected to get into debate about either Jane Eyre (...boring) or Moby Dick (awful, ... and boring) but I don't think it's entirely fair to suggest that Moby Dick demonstrates American classism because Ahab's word is gospel. The absolute sovereignty of a ship's captain still pretty much exists - for good reason. All ships are hierarchical structures. Moby Dick demonstrates American classism because the "lesser" races could not possibly become officers (which incidentally, is still pretty true of commercial shipping around the world).


Julia I agree with the point made about Jane Eyre being about an independant woman and not about a romance, but I was very disappointed at the end when Jane went back to Rochester. He had not redeemed himself, he had simply lost his wife and his sight. Jane married him despite the fact that his morals were no different than they were when he was privileged. This is evident because Rochester still didn't care for his ward, so we can see he still did not have an especially lovely disposition.


Nataliya Julia wrote: "I agree with the point made about Jane Eyre being about an independant woman and not about a romance, but I was very disappointed at the end when Jane went back to Rochester. He had not redeemed hi..."

Well, here's what I think. Mr. Rochester may have not redeemed himself in the way we'd like to see, but what seems important to Jane is that he has suffered and has been humbled by his suffering (from what I understand, suffering reading to redemption is a big theme in Christianity, and Jane is a passionate believer). He was brought down from his pedestal by his suffering, and it seems that to Jane that was enough of a cleansing of his soul to forgive him. His wife dying also made him not an adulterer, not a sinner, allowing Jane to marry him/legally love him, which she refused to do while he was still married. It's not about him changing his morals - it's about paying for his transgressions in suffering that redeems him in Jane's eyes. I never expected him to suddenly develop a lovely sunny personality - that would have been a cheap trick, a Bronte's rendition of Dickens' 'A Christmas Carol'. I also enjoyed the role reversal that comes in the end - Jane, an independent and relatively successful woman almost does him a favor by marrying him (she definitely does not need him to support her - she's fine on her own), while previously he was fulfilling the generous benefactor role, marrying a young governess who was essentially a nobody.

As for Rochester and Adele - while I so not condone Rochester's coldness towards a girl who may or may not have been his child (and he believes she isn't), he still did more that any of the men of his time would have by taking her in and assuming responsibility for her, providing her with a respectable home and education. Jane received less kindness than that from her known blood relatives.


message 49: by Sesana (new)

Sesana I echo your read, Nataliya. Also, Rochester's overall personality was not a problem for Jane. She loved him as he was. It was the clash of morality that came between them, not a clash of personalities. Personally, I felt like Rochester's injury redeemed him through more than just suffering. Wouldn't it have been very easy to simply leave Bertha behind? And there's his cold brand of kindness towards Adele. Very, very few men of his day would have done as much for a girl they believed to be their natural daughter. They'd consider themselves to be quite generous in merely providing for her education. Elsewhere.


David I am very impressed by the time and thoughtful consideration you have put into writing this review of Jane Eyre, a novel which, in my view, is fully worth the depth and quality of what you say. You are to be congratulated.


« previous 1 3 4
back to top